FY11 Research Plan - Stanford University

PPA Budget Planning: August 26, 2010

David B. MacFarlane, William Wisniewski, and Rafael Alva

August 26, 2010

FY11 Research Plan Goal Setting and Budgets


Content

• Desired outcomes for the planning and budget exercise• Background and key assumptions

– Planning Priorities– Financial Situation

• FY10 Financial Model - Recap • Continuing Resolution and quarterly apportionment

• Budget direction for FY11• Key questions • Expectations and timelines • Background

– Templates


Desired Outcomes for the Budget and Planning Exercise

• Align Goals and Resources– Input to revising “Lab Agenda” currently underway– “Lab Budget” due ~Oct. 15; dictates the timing of the exercise– Provide PPA management and department heads with a set of well

defined goals for the coming year– Organized on near-, mid- and long-term time scales

• Critical outcomes (5-10 years) define long-term goals• Strategic (2-5 years) define intermediate steps to critical outcomes• Tactical (0-2 years) connects directly to individual performance goals

– Transparency– Ability to make difficult decisions– Ability to relocate and prioritize based on program needs,

schedules, and financial constraints


Desired Outcomes for the Budget and Planning Exercise

• Provide a baseline for the year to which we will be accountable for execution and budget accuracy

• Validate resources and align funding with other directorates– Input to planning by other directorates, e.g. professional center

rates, scientific computing– HEP funding/program direction to ARD

• Current exercise is just the start of a year long process with a mid-year check point on goals and forecasts– Initial plan: 10/2010), Mid-year update: 5/2011


Background and Key AssumptionsPlanning Criteria

• Importance and impact of science opportunity includes long-term goals as a laboratory HEP effort

• Alignment with national priorities: HEPAP, P-5, PASAG, ASTRO2010, etc

• Coherence of overall PPA plan• Match to current or future capabilities• Availability of core research staff and/or faculty• Responding to and supporting user community


Requested relief in FY2012FY10 New Model only

Full FY10 impact

FY12 Forecast

Scientific computing + $3550K + $3600K + $1700K

Indirect rate changes & professional centers + $2900K + $4300K + $2100K

Changes in program support + $1000K + $1000K + $500K

Total impact of new financial model + $7450K + $8900K + $4300K

Strategy:• For FY2010 and FY2011, use FY09 carry-forward and manage head

count, including possible migration to other areas at SLAC. • By FY2012 reduce impact of indirects and program support changes by

~50% of FY2010 levels. The remaining financial impact is absorbed through headcount management.

• Projected evolution of HEP share of installed computing hardware onsite and reductions in service levels will reduce computing recharge costs by ~50%.

Background and Key AssumptionsFinancial Situation – FY10 Financial Model


Background and Key AssumptionsFinancial Situation – FY10 Financial Model

• Worked toward an agreed FY2012 model for SLAC HEP– Used “Scenario A’ Super B” (assumes minimal investment in Super

B and no additional funding for an inflation adjustment in FY11) with a step of $4.3M in FY2012 core funding to partially offset financial model impacts. - (not certain what we will get this in 2012).

• Implementation in FY2010 and FY2011– Projected planned budgets in FY2010 and FY2011 to match

FY2012 model– Positioned carry-forward in B&R accounts to offset anticipated

impact of indirects rate and/or computing recharge costs– Technical complications:

• Can only move carry-forward within a restricted set of B&R codes and otherwise need to move current year allocations

– Created a full list of changes and worked with office to implement most of these in the August financial plan, and some in September


Background and Key AssumptionsFinancial Situation – Other

• Planning on a six-month continuing resolution – Expect 11/12 of the FY11 funding and “no new starts”– “No new starts” means that projects can proceed with R&D, but new

MIEs cannot be started possibly delaying CD-1 reviews; this may impact e.g. LSST

– Minimize new hires and M&S

• Quarterly apportionment– OMB has decided to expand the practice of apportion approved

funding on quarterly basis to DOE programs effective Oct 1, 2010. – This means that we won’t receive our annual funding up front, but

on quarterly basis depending on our spending plan. – It will force an increased level of forecast accuracy to +/- 5%, and

we need to plan the purchase timing of large M&S items.


Expected Financial Plan for FY2011

9

Reduction

Reduction

Reduction

Reduction


Budget Direction for FY2011

• FY11 PPA financial situation is very critical– Funding is limited and the financial envelope is already defined for

most programs

• Counting with natural reduction in BABAR and some ARD migration to LCLS II to mitigate the FY10 “Financial Model Impact”– High level of uncertainty and limited funding for the Super B

program in FY11

• During FY11 we will run out of non-fenced carry forward leaving PPA and HEP-AD vulnerable to additional funding fluctuations

• Expectations are that FY12 will also be a difficult year


Budget Direction for FY2011

• As a result, this year’s annual budget will be somewhat different from previous exercises – Not truly a bottoms-up exercise, but rather a validation of current

head count-FTE assumptions– Minimal allocation for M&S and travel based on historical usage– Will discuss specific M&S program needs, but in general M&S and

travel will be very tight

• In addition, there will be targeted exercises to answer a handful of very specific programmatic questions


Budget Direction for FY2011Developing a PPA Research Plan

• Lab management plan incorporates a commitment that each Directorate will annually develop and/or revise its “business” or research plan– Directorate level implementation plan for “lab agenda” currently

under discussion and revision• Lab agenda = “what, when, who”, with measurable strategic outcomes• PPA plan = “How” and the details of how we measure outcomes

– Informs priorities for Operations and Accelerator Directorates

• Input from all Directorates discussed yesterday in the senior management retreat– Good progress and now interacting on revised lab-level plan


Strategic Objectives

5‐10

years

• Targeted programs in particle physics, particle astrophysics & cosmology

• Establish a leading dark energy science program• Establish SLAC as major partner in next generation direct dark

matter search • Retain SLAC as a world leader intensity frontier quark flavor

physics• Engage in LHC upgrade program• Play a leading US role in initiating next generation particle

astrophysics experiments, such as CTA or EXO, through CD-0• Premier electron accelerator laboratory

• Establish fundamental electron and positron acceleration properties for PWFA and secure CD-0 for demonstration phase for PWFA collider

• Establish warm x-band technology for warm energy frontier collider and other science applications

SLAC Agenda - PPA


SLAC Agenda - PPALabo

ratory Initiatives

2‐5 years

PPA• Execute the construction of the LSST camera and develop the data

management system• Execute the fabrication of SuperCDMS sensors and construct germanium

towers for SNOLab• Execute the design and construction of collider and detector systems for a

high-luminosity next generation B-factory project• Support the optimal performance of the Fermi LAT instrument and the

delivery of high quality data to the scientific collaboration • Steward a device development program that supports ultrafast x-ray

detector and PPA science programs at SLAC (Joint with LCLS & SSRL)HEP accelerator R&D

• Execute PWFA research program to demonstrate electron/positron acceleration properties with FACET; advance proposals for PWFA demonstration phase following FACET

• Secure funding from non HEP sources to execute coherent research, development, and industrialization projects for X-band technology

PPA Budget Planning: August 26, 2010 8/31/2010 8:28 AM

Tactical Actions

0‐2 years

PPA• Execute CD-2 on LSST and define and propose dark energy science

center• Execute CD-2 on Super CDMS project• Secure a 5-year extended mission (2013-2018) from NASA and DOE for

the Fermi GST• Perform critical R&D and develop high-luminosity next generation B-factory

project through CD-2• With LCLS & SSRL identify leader of detector R&D program by Q2 FY11• Identify and recruit key leaders

HEP accelerator R&D• Identify and recruit key leadership, a wider research community and a

concrete initial research program for PWFA at FACET; concept development for FACET II

• Identify and consolidate core competencies in high gradient and RF source technology

• Develop international partnerships and a proposal for a coherent research, development and industrialization proposal for x-band program

SLAC Agenda - PPA


FY11 Key Questions & Actions

• Proton Research and ATLAS M&O:– Complete implementation of planned Atlas profile and stabilize

current scope

• Electron Research– Understand manpower needs with or without SuperB– Implementation plan for Heavy Photon/APEX and impact on SiD

• BABAR Computing – Plan, scope and schedule for archival system (software)– Retirement schedule for the end-of-lifetime computing equipment



• Nonaccelerator Research– Overall constraint on total KA13 budget– CDMS

• Ramp-up plan for CDMS SNOLab R&D in accordance with funding envelope

– LSST • Ramp-up LSST R&D in anticipation of the project start• Need to define the minimum and desired level of funding required pre-

CD1 and pre-CD2– EXO

• Stabilize EXO 200 it moves from commissioning to operations; minimize full EXO R&D within the funding envelope



– CTA• Need to understand the level of funding available from DOE for the

R&D collaboration and SLAC effort – Computational Cosmology

• Minimal level of investment in while computational cosmology proposal is in preparation and under review

• Accelerator Science and Development – Ramp-up PWFA and reduce Accelerator Development in

accordance with funding envelope • ILC

– Potential for reduced national investment in 2011• FACET Operations

– Operations/AIPs and support for the experimental program – Need a bottoms–up estimate first and then need to align on the

funding model with BES



• Detector R&D – Interesting projects exceed funding and we need prioritize possible

activities; needs leadership to be run as a program

• ESTB – Need an updated plan and ongoing operations proposal

• PEP MMS/ D&D – We are assuming MMS completion in 2010 and D&D planning and

design in 2011– Need to identify a team to do the design and planning– Need to define a budget, scope and schedule for FY11

• Scientific Computing Re-Charge– Ongoing lab-level discussions about funding model



• G4, SPIRES and SciDB– Size programs to available funding; currently preparing a proposal

to DOE for SPIRES funding

• Professional Service Centers: REGM, REGE, SCA– Need a head count model that matches projected funding from

anticipated PPA and non-PPA customers– Need to also ensure viability of center operations


Plan Specifics and TimelinesRoles and Responsibilities

• PPA: David MacFarlane/William Wisniewski/Rafael Alva– Overseeing all HEP funds

• Financial Analysts:– Kan Fong: PPA DO, PPA Travel Commitment Files, KIPAC Theory,

Theory , O&E Cosmology, CDMS, Atlas, G4/SPIRES & Prof Center Comp.

– Linda Price: Fermi ISOC, Fermi Physics, BABAR Physics & Collaboration; ATLAS, Super B, Detector R&D and SiD, Professional Centers REGM, REGE, SCA

– Robert Woods: LSST, EXO, JDEM, DES, PEP MMS


Plan Specifics and Timelines

• Budget planning assume 52% Indirects and 10% Program Support

• Headcount actions continue to require Directorate approval:– Replacement– Extension– Additions

• Using WBS = Current Programs• Moving to full visibility of total budget including overhead vs.

budgeting at direct budget level only• Focus on headcount

– Program Directors work with supporting departments to define the scope of work and understand the resources required to carry out the work



• M&S will need to be planned by month • Bottoms up and prioritized approach to travel budget

planning– Travel is controlled by DOE– Cannot swap between M&S and Travel– Conference Approval – long lead time – 75 Days– Mandatory Planning Tool: PPA Travel Logs

• Travel and M&S is going to be very tight! Plan accordingly



• Plan for approved LDRD Proposals – PPA will have a few approved LDRD proposals

• Other Important factors to consider– Identify possible non-DOE/HEP funding – Identify early the need for Financial Plan Transfers\MPOs for

National Labs and University Subcontracts for Universities• Long lead time• Might need Subcontracts

• Purchased Equipment, CEPs and GPP/Infrastructure– Include in the Budget Template– Same due date

• Tasks and activity schedules– Needs in FY11 for long-lead procurements


PPA Budget Templates


FY11 Budget Planning Timeline

FY11 Budget and FY10 Close Time line

16 ‐ 20 23 ‐27 30 ‐ 3 6 ‐ 10 13 ‐ 17 20 ‐ 24 27 ‐ 1 4 ‐ 8 11 ‐ 15 18 ‐ 22 25 ‐ 29 1 ‐ 5 8 ‐ 12

Budget FY 11

Kick‐offDept Mgrs Prepare Input Budget FrozenDept Mgrs and Fin Analyst Prepare BudgetProf Center RatesDept Reviews with DMCFDivision ReviewsConsolidation and Final ReviewPreparation for Lab ReviewALDs Meeting

Publish 1st Report

FY 10 Close

Implement FY10 FPT

Last day for Time Sheet revAccruals PS/ Prof Centers and Indirects True‐up

August September October November

Communication of Approved Budget to Dept Mgrs.

*

*

*


FY11 Budget Planning Process and Schedule

When What Who

Aug 26 –31 , 2010

Templates with budget information and guidance to Dept Heads

Financial Analyst

Aug 30 –Sept 17 2009

Initial budget roll up for PPA and budget meeting with Financial Analyst

Dept Mgrs. and PPA Planning Office

Sept 3 PPA Prof Center rates ready

REGM, REGE, SCA and Financial Analyst

Sept 13 to Oct 1st

Dept review FY11plan PPA management

Dept Mgr, Fin Analyst and PPA Mgt.

When What Who

Oct 4 Budget frozen PPA Fin Analyst and Dept Mgrs

Oct 4 to Oct 12

Final PPA plan and prepare for Lab review

PPA Dir & Planning/ Div Heads

Oct 15 Lab review PPA Mgmt

Oct 29 Final budget communicated to Dept Mgrs

PPA Mgmt and Fin Analyst


Input to research plan

• Examples– BABAR D&D:

• Tactical: Complete the removal of the barrel DIRC and EMC, and dismantling of barrel steel

• Strategic: Complete D&D to make components available for SuperB– LSST:

• Tactical: Complete sensor prototype and vendor qualification• Strategic: Execute development plan for CD-1 and CD-2 reviews;

develop a plan for dark energy science center• Critical Outcomes: Precision exploration of dark energy enabled

• Action:– Prepare 1-2 transparencies that organize your thoughts on tactical,

strategic, and critical outcomes for your department– Will form the basis for discussions with PPA management in July

and development of the PPA research plan


Plan Specifics and TimelinesHomework Summary

• Homework for PPA Departments in preparation for management review – Provide summary of program goals (see back-up)– Review head count assumptions with financial planners– Address key programmatic questions– Highlight special programmatic M&S needs and indicate priorities– Prepare slide highlighting program strengths and weaknesses, as

well as opportunities and risks


Back-up


PPA Budget Templates (Cont’d)

New DOE Office of Science approval requirements for attending “events”


2011 Program High Level Direction

Expectations Programs Direction Mature and well defined Programs

Theory, FGST, KIPAC Theory O&E, FACET MIE, BABAR D&D, RF sources, Det. R&D

Already defined or flat, possible reduction to enable growth in other areas

Realignment ATLAS, HEP Computing and Electron (BABAR & SiD)

Decrease based in DOE direction

Two Scenarios:* Minimal Baseline(6 mo CR)* Growth Scenario

LSST and Super B Program specific

Other HEP - AD Acc Science, Gral. Acc. Development, LARP and ILC

Growth Acc Science Novel Acc , Decrease Gral. Acc. Dev. otherwise Flat

Bottoms-up EXO 200, PEP-MMS, FACET Ops., CDMs

Program specific but with DOE funding constraints

Other Lab Support JDEM, DES Negotiated with lead lab for R&D $s otherwise only science support

Incubators CMB, CTA (previously AGIS), KIPAC Computing , Heavy Photon

Partially Funded with LDRD and small incremental DOE funding otherwise funded by redirection from other programs.

Professional Centers REGE ,REGM & CSA Size in accordance to programmatic funding

Note: Sci. Computing Re-charge currently under revision for affordability

FY11 Research Plan - Stanford University

Documents

Transcript of FY11 Research Plan - Stanford University